A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around December 7, 2016, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim D on September 27, 2016, stating that “The Defendant would have the victim D receive a contract for road construction and electric source housing construction to Pocheon E, a site management, electricity, water supply, and boiler construction.”

However, the defendant did not have any authority over the construction site at the time, so even if he received money from the victim, he did not have the intent or ability to re-subcontract a part of the above construction site to the victim.

Nevertheless, on September 27, 2016, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, received a total of KRW 1 million from the victim to the F bank account (G) in the name of the Defendant on September 27, 2016, KRW 1 million to the above account on October 11 of the same year, and KRW 4 million to the above account on October 18 of the same year, including KRW 2 million, from the above account, and acquired it as the public corporation’s funds.

2. On November 3, 2016, around November 3, 2016, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “Around November 3, 2016, the Defendant would have the victim D resume the construction of the parking lot suspended at H. When the construction is resumed, it would be possible to resume the construction of the parking lot at H. When the construction is resumed, the Defendant would be able to perform the construction of electricity, equipment, and CCTV at the construction site at the site of the said construction site, which would change KRW 10 million with the cost of the street.

However, the fact was that the investor or the comprehensive construction company did not appear to invest at least KRW 300 million in advance in order to resume the above construction site at the time. Therefore, even if the above construction site was transferred, it was inappropriate to resume the above construction site even if it was transferred, and the victim did not have any authority over the above construction site, so there was no intention or ability to allow the victim to perform part of the construction site.

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as above, and is under the name of the defendant from the victim.